this is gps, the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. today on the show, president trump has said since he was elected, he wanted to bring peace to the middle east. >> peace between israel and the palestinians. >> this week with benjamin netanyahu at his side, trump unveiled his plan. the reaction in the room wa was elation.

from the palestinians, anger. i'll talk to president trump senior adviser jared kushner, the man who worked for three years to produce this plan. can this bring real peace and in-depth interviews? and black, white, brown, rich, poor, middle as, rurclass, suburban. america is more divided than ever in the country's modern history. how did we get so polarized? ezra klein explains. but first here's my take. the leaks from john bolton's forthcoming book are only the most recent revelation in the impeachment process. but put together all the revelations from current and former trump officials and compare them against a chart of public support for removing

trump from office. it looks like the ekg of someone after a fatal heart attack, a flat line. nothing changes people's views. the story of this impeachment is the story of american politics today. polarization. it affects almost every aspect of american political life and has now been studied by scholars from many different angles. wouldn't be it great if someone would digest all these studies, synthesize them and produce a readable book that makes sense of it all? ezra klein has done just that with his compelling new work, "why we're polarized." klein begins by explaining that polarization is actually nothing new. americans have been divided for a long time. the policy differences in the 1950s and 1960s of southern segregation among liberals and free society advocates were actually greater than most of

those democrats and republicans today. but back then, each party contained within it a variety of political views, which meant these differences had to be n navigated and negotiated. liberal democrats had to temper their zeal because their political power in the senate depended on the southern wing of the party. since 1964, when the democrats broke with the segregationists, obviously a good thing, the parties have sorted idealogically and policy differences have become weaponized. one mega shift that's greatly exaggerated polarization is partisanship today is largely about identity, not policy. identity itself is increasingly determined by demographic factors, above all after the obama presidency, race. the book "identity crisis" points out that until recently, white working class voters were evenly split between the two parties. by 2015, they leaned republican

by 24 percentage points. and once identities are at the heart of political differences, klein argues, facts will not change people's minds. people have chosen their parties for reasons of tribal loyalty, and a better health care bill will not alter that deep sense of belonging. this crucial insight is something democrats in particular need to internalize. the key to gaining support among undecided voters probably lies in addressing their identity concerns rather than their economic ones. past democratic luminaries like bill clinton were masters at this sort of symbolic politics. because of america's political geography, polarization affects the two parties differently, klein argues. republicans are a more homogeneous group centered around white men and have a huge geographic advantage given the electoral system.

considering they have lost the popular vote in four of the last five presidential elections and yet won the white house in two of those cases. democrats need to appeal to a broader coalition than do republicans. it's just a fact. in order to compete in new england states and win the electoral college. klein's book is powerful, intelligent and depressing. the american political system is not a parliamentary one in which one party gains control of all branches of government and can then pursue its agenda. power is shared between three branches with overlapping authority. the founders despised the idea of parties and imagined constantly shifting factions. in their framework some degree of compromise and cooperation is essential to getting anything done. which is why polarization has utterly paralyzed american government. for more go to cnn.com/fareed and read my "washington post" column this week. and let's get started.

in november 2016, fresh from his surprising election as president of the united states, donald trump told the "new york times" that he wanted to be the president who brought peace to the middle east. he said he wanted his son-in-law jared kushner to be centrally involved in the effort. a few months later, trump announced that kushner would take the lead in doing what many thought to be impossible. israel was the second country trump visited as president, and right by his side was senior adviser jared kushner. this week trump announced the details of his so-called peace to prosperity plan, this time with embattled prime minister benjamin netanyahu by his side. notably absent from the room was the other side of the deal, the palestinians. indeed, the leader of the palestinians called it the slap

of the century as opposed to the deal of the century as trump supporters are calling it. i had the opportunity to talk to the man behind it all, jared kushner, on friday. jared kushner, pleasure to have you on. >> pleasure to be with you, fareed. >> you've put out this plan. on bun side the israelis, most of the spectrum likes it. it does allow israel to annex most of the settlements, almost all of them, in fact, legalizing something that most administrations, democrat and republican, had so far withheld next to the jordan valley. you're asking the palestinians to say yes. in order to get this deal, i'm trying to understand how you get to a yes and yes, because you have two sides to this party. on the one side you've given a lot of stuff that you ask of the palestinians. in the last week, you've been pretty belligerent about that.

you said, if they want to screw things up like they've screwed up before, tough for them, they can't be victims anymore. what is your strategy to get the palestinians to say yes? because it seems like you've come out with what even the "wall street journal" calls a pro-israel peace plan, and now you're berating the palestinians. how are they going to say yes now? >> i think we have to look at what's been accomplished over the past week. we've been looking at this for three years. we've studied this very carefully, and what president trump has been able to accomplish this last week, first, is unify israel on a plan of divisive politics, which has never been done before. he got israel to agree to a state plan laid out. i see you have it there. it's a very extensive document. the peace initiative, which was the first attempt, and a great attempt, was about eight lines. the next attempts that have been

done are two or three pages of high-level concepts. what the president has done is released a 180-page, very detailed road map to allow to get this done and live side by side in peace in a coexistent way. he released the plan and then got a map. there has never been a map made public that has been agreed to by a side, and i think that established the basis for how do we move forward. the people have been trying this for years. the israeli peace process is probably the most complicated problem in the world, so what we've tried to do is take a pragmatic approach to it. we tried to do it differently, and i think for the first time there is a real offer on the table to break the log jam, and it's up to the palestinians to see if they have the opportunity to pursue it. >> that was a very good explanation of the plan. it doesn't answer my question. you've done a plan that the

"wall street journal" says is a pro-israeli plan. you're asking a lot of the palestinians. you're berating them. why are they going to say yes? what is the strategy here? >> you had a lot of the arab countries come out and call this a very serious plan and a basis for negotiation. i think that's never happened before, and i think that will take a little while to sink in for the world. israel has always been isolated, but you have the u.k., the european union, poland, you have a lot of good european countries come out in favor of this, and then you had a lot of arabic countries, whether it was saudi arabia, egypt, qatar. what people were saying was they would like to see this issue resolved, and this is a good framework for negotiations. the palestinians, i've not been berating them, it's speaking the truth. they rejected this before it came out. they called for a day of rage and said they want a state. but the people who want a state aren't calling for a day of rage and then mampi ingmarching in t

streets. what we hope they will do is read the plan but not do it the way they've done it for years. what we want to do, one final thing, is our intention is to lay out a framework that can make the lives of the palestinian people better. we laid out a $50 billion plan that if implemented, it got a lot of acclaim on details of it. this will make the palestinians' lives better and we're engaged to try to do that. if that's the objective, then this is as real a framework as they've ever had. i'll just say again, people complain a lot. they try to find reasons why it will fail. what president trump has done on this and what he tries to do on so many other issues is try to find a pathway to move forward to make people's lives better and move problems that have been stuck in the mud for a long time. >> you're saying you're promising a palestinian state. but this is what suggests to me

there will never be a palestinian state according to this plan. on page 44, it says according to a palestinian state being recognized is there must be free press, free elections, guarantee of religious freedom, independent judiciary, financial institutions that are as good and fair as the western world, and the u.s. and israel will judge whether the palestinians have achieved this. now, i think i'm right in saying there is no arab country that would meet these criteria, certainly not saudi arabia or egypt, which are the countries you've worked with very closely. isn't this just a way of telling the palestinians you're never actually going to get a state? because if no arab countries today in a position that you're demanding of the palestinians before they can be made a state, effectively it's a killer amendment. you're saying there won't be a state. >> i think this is our basis. if you don't want to respect human rights, if you want to not

allow people to speak freely -- >> saudi arabia cannot be a country because it doesn't have any. >> that's not a question in the debate. if you're israel, how do we get them to compromise on territorial dispute? israel has been attacked many times in history through defensive wars. they've been able to conquer territory. since they've done that, they've been able to thrive as a country, they've become a powerhouse militarily, they're a powerhouse economically, intelligencewise. and they're doing very well. you have palestinian people trapped under the rule they have now. you have the palestinian authority, the ruler of it, who i think is a man who does want peace. he's in the 16th year of a four-year term. it's not a thriving democracy in that regard. you're in a state where the people don't have the rights to thrive. when we did the conference in bahrain, we had all the people from around the world coming.

>> except the palestinians? >> they didn't come because they handed out flyers saying anyone who goes, we have a bullet for them. but to my point, people were saying we care about the palestinian people, we're dying to invest and create jobs there, but nobody said israel was the problem. number one, nobody wants to make capital expenditures where there's fear of terrorism. they don't want to move their people in and they don't want to make investments where there is no stability agreement. the second thing is you need a government structure. who is going to make capital investments where you don't have a rule of law? you have to ask yourself, israel has been a convenient scapegoat for the palestinian authority, and it's been the middle world for the mideast to deflect from the shortcomings internally in a lot of these countries. but for the palestinians, if they want people to live better lives, we now have the framework for doing it. if they can't uphold these

standards, i don't think we can get europe to recognize them as a state to allow them to take control of themselves, because the only thing we have that's worse is a failed state. that happens through terror and radicalization and through the neighbors. next on "gps," on monday iowa holds the first contest of the 2020 election. the election itself is less than 275 days away. jared kushner on donald trump's strategy to win again.

♪ beds get sick too protection. lysol laundry sanitizer kills 99.9% of illness- causing bacteria detergent leaves behind. lysol. what it takes to protect. 1 in 3 deaths is caused by cardiovascular disease. millions of patients are treated with statins-but up to 75% persistent cardiovascular risk still remains. many have turned to fish oil supplements. others, fenofibrates or niacin. but here's a number you should take to heart: zero-the number of fda approvals these products have, when added to statins, to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. ask your doctor about an advancement in prescription therapies with proven protection. visit truetoyourheart.com brushing only reaches 25% of your mouth.

listerine® cleans virtually 100%. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™ ♪ ♪ ♪ applebee's new irresist-a-bowls now starting at $7.99. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood. a but i hearsearches fa different calling. the call of a schmear of cream cheese. for i, am a schmelier. i practice my craft at philadelphia. here, we use only the freshest milk...

that one! go! go! and the finest ingredients... what is this? until perfection is achieved. she's ready. schmears! philadelphia. schmear perfection.

let me ask you about the campaign because you are now moving on to run the president's campaign, or at least to be substantially involved in it.

the conventional wisdom is the impeachment process has helped him by arousing his base. once impeachment is done with, will people not come to the conclusion that lamar alexander came to the conclusion that this behavior was wrong even though that was not impeachable, and over time could that hurt the president? >> i think there is a big difference between what the voters see and what the voters want, and what people maybe in washington or the media are calling for. what we've seen since the impeachment started is that most people, by the way, are not paying attention to it. we've seen the president's numbers go up by seven points. we got polling back last night that the president's approval rating nationally was over 50%. it's the highest it's been since right around the inauguration. >> the average is more like 44. >> i think it was 46%, but everything is relative, right? there were a lot of polls wrong in the last election.

i think our data proves to be more right in the public polls and it will continue to be. in the last election, when mitt romney ran, 2% of the people who disapproved of him voted for him. in the last election, 15% of people who disapproved of donald trump as a candidate ended up voting for him. i think his base is strong and getting stronger. last night we were in iowa. we had a massive crowd. the energy i'm feeling today is stronger than what we felt at the end of the campaign last year. i think that president trump has not lost many supporters, if any at all, and i think that a lot of people who said, well, what's he talking about, now he's actually done all the things he's promised. he's actually done more things than he's promised. he got criminal justice reform work done. he didn't promise he was going to do that. he's done a lot of things he didn't promise he would do, and the american economy has never been stronger. we have 2.5 million americans who have been lifted out of

poverty, almost 10 million americans who have come off of food stamps. the numbers are unbelievable. so so as we finish implementing our agenda, hopefully we'll do more tax cuts as we focus on becoming energy independent, bringing down energy costs for people. people in work force training, training people for the future, the economy. we have a lot of things. focusing on the judiciary where the president has been very successful. the potential for making this country strong is unbelievable and the president has been very enthusiastic about what he's been able to accomplish so far. >> you work with the white house, you work with the president, obviously a special relationship. but why do you think it is that so many people who work for him leave feeling very dissatisfied that he's done a lot of wrong things, that he asked them to do wrong things?

i'm thinking of john bolton, general mattis, scaramucci, i could go on. it feels like a lot of people have that feeling. are they all just wrong? >> no, i think being in the white house under this administration is a very intense experience, right? the president has increased the metabolism of washington. he's a businessperson. he's not a politician. he demands results. he demands that you work hard, that you deliver. what i've seen is that the cream has risen, and i'm not going to say what the word is, but that is saying. he took out a lot of people that weren't successful here, and a lot of people who have been excellent are not out there writing books and complaining because they're working. i think if you look at the results this administration has produced, to do a trade deal on ttp, they worked on it for five years, it was a horrific trade deal. and usmca got done in a year and

then it took another year to get it through congress. china, the president got it done. the middle east, the president was the first one to get israel to agree to these restored concessions to make the impossible possible. this isn't happening because you have a bunch of disgruntled people running around. when the president has bad people, he moves them out and then he's able to attract tremendous people. when i look around at the administration, the white house, the cabinet, i think the people we have now are spectacular. i feel honored every day to work with them, and i honestly believe we're getting things done and we're getting better and better at this every day. i'll say this. the president is very focused. he really does not -- he's not somebody who is taking political decisions, he's saying what's right or wrong for the country. and as an american, whether you voted for the president or you didn't vote for him, i think you can be very proud you have a president that shows up every day for work, tries to make our country stronger, make our

country richer and keep our country safe. when we come back, more on my interview to the senior adviser to the president, jared kushner. whoa! (man) how hot is the diablo chili? the senior adviser to the president, jared kushner. the senior adviser to the president, jared kushner. adviser to the president, jared kushner. i the senior adviser to the president, jared kushner. t the senior adviser to the president, jared kushner. h the senior adviser to the president, jared kushner. our new forester just made it even bigger. (woman) so what should we do second? (vo) the 2019 subaru forester. the most adventurous forester ever. most people think as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready.

laso you can enjoy it even ifst you're sensitive. se. yet some say it isn't real milk. i guess those cows must actually be big dogs. sit! i said sit! tit's great actually, i've been listening to audible. it's audiobooks, news, meditations... gotta go! ♪ ♪ hey! you know, i do think it's weird you've started commuting when you work from home. i'll be in my office. download audible and start every day off right.

jared kushner, you have been involved in a lot of the trade negotiations. let's talk about the one with mexico and canada. bush's trade representative, robert zelek, why this was a bad deal, that it actually, in many

ways, added conditions that we were going to reduce the free flow of goods in capital. the conservative republican senator says this would be the first trade agreement in the history of the public that is designed to diminish trade. so that's two prominent republicans who have been involved in trade who think the net effect of the deal you negotiated is actually to diminish trade, which means diminish gdp. >> right. so i'll answer all the different things you said. first of all, it got 89 votes in the senate which is pretty unheard of, which shows there is a wide swath of popularity to this deal. you have the farmers endorsing it, you have labor endorsing it. you have manufacturers endorsing it. you have a wide range of endorsements across the spectrum that you don't usually get. look, i was not involved in trade globally in my previous life and i got involved in this. president trump had a very radical view of trade from what the conventional republican thinking was.

people like pat toomey and zelig, they had a doctoring for what it was. president trump said, how do you trade the american worker, how do you protect the american economy? the president's instincts on trade are 100% right. if deficit doesn't matter, why does every country i deal with want to have one? >> then it's a good thing that the trade deficit went up. >> no. there are structural things. over time you want to reduce the trade deficit. the trade deficit is a transfer of wealth. that's what the president believes and i believe that as well. >> and his administration is a sign of strength. >> america has been pacing the world. unemployment and the dollar bill are stronger. let's go back to the trade stuff of the with regard to this deal, what's so spectacular about this deal, it modernizes all our trade policies, digital trade,

all the technology. the most important thing it does, it protects american manufacturing. under ttp, you could have made 90% of the car outside america and shipped it in with a tariff. now 70% of the car has to be made in america which protects the proponents in michigan, ohio, many places. when all these trade deals were done, with nafta and the wto, we've had american companies shut down since then. the globalization was distributed. the price of a t-shirt went down for everybody, but the cost was implemented. a lot of these communities were hollowed out economically because of these trade policies and no way to transition workers who were in these situations to better or different jobs as the economy evolved. i do think president trump says all the time the era of economic

surrender is over, and i believe this trade deal with 89% in the senate is being praised as the greatest trade deal of all time. it's the largest trade deal in the history of the world and it will add about half a point gdp to america's economy every year. may bring about 200 jobs to america, maybe as many as 500 jobs. >> jared kushner, glad to have you on. >> thank you. a pleasure to be with you. next on gps, there have long been fakes in the world of fashion, art and more. now we have the world of deep fakes where people can be made to appear to say things they never said. we'll get into the deep dangers and solutions.

man: how can i deliver superior long-term results? it begins with a distinctive approach to managing money. that for over 85 years has focused on keeping confidence up when markets are down. an approach where portfolio managers work well independently. and even better together.

who don't just invest, but are personally invested. can i find a proven approach designed to deliver results? with capital group, i can. talk to your advisor or consultant for investment risks and information.

now for our "what in the world" segment. these days it's hard to believe what you hear.

it turns out it is probably the largest audience watching the inauguration address. >> they say the noise is cancer. without having to worry about doubting what you see. that's what's exposed by the deep fakes, ads made by artificial intelligence that can actually make you believe what you're seeing is real. like this video which is a deep fake created by buzzfeed to raise awareness about this information. or this fake video, the former italian minister by a satirical television show depicting him denouncing political opponents. so how do you make these increasingly convincing videos? they rely on machine learning, algorithms that produce reams of video/audio by, say, a public official or actor to create something entirely new.

there is also cheap fakes which are altered without using ai, like this viral video of nancy pelosi. >> engaged in a cover-up. >> -- whose speech was slowed down to make it seem like she was slurring her words. the video is becoming more rapid and more lifelike. >> jeremy corbin, prime minister. >> it's easy to see what could happen if this technology were in the wrong hands. as law professor danielle citron noted, deep fakes already proliferate online. one report found that 96% of these are nonconsensual pornography. supporters imagine a deep fake coming out on the eve of the 2020 election, irreparably damaging a political candidate. or imagine a fake video purportedly from a ceo, trashing his own company designed to cause that company's stock to

crash even for a few hours. deep fakes provides so many possibilities for deception. imagine if president trump has dismissed the "access hollywood" tape as a deep fake. can you imagine if his supporters had lined up behind him and believed that it had been artificially created? it's been run did i the same autocratic dynasty by more than five decades, first by al ali bongo. he stopped making public appearances. rumors started about the state of his health. the government announced he had had a stroke. then as radio lab reported in a fascinating recent episode, that december ali bongo appeared in an address to ring in the new year. or did he? viewers pointed out something strange and stilted in the address. his head moved strangely.

he barely blinked. as radio lab reported, a political web activist proclaimed the address a deep fake, and some proclaim that bongo was actually dead. and this seemed to have little consequences. after the death, military officials attempted a coup. in the end they didn't succeed, and experts said they had no evidence that the new year address was fake. but that didn't matter. the existence of deep fakes and well-timed suggestions from activists and political opponents made people doubt what they saw. deep fakes can't be eradicated, but there are ways to curtail their spread. facebook recently announced it would ban most deep fakes from its website, but that ban is already being criticized for not doing too much. the defense department has also invested in technology to detect deep fakes politically. one solution to the deep fakes

problem is the same as the remedy for the spread of any other kind of information. congress should make social media companies responsible for the content posted on their platforms, which would pressure them to stop the dissem natiina. it won't stop them, but it will help stop them from spreading so wildly. deep fakes open up a pandora's box that can't be closed, but the problem can be perhaps managed and controlled better. next on "gps," why is america so polarized? ezra klein answers the big question very well when we come back. saved a bunch of money.

oh, you got it. you are such a smart bear! call geico and see how easy saving on homeowners and condo insurance can be.

♪ ♪ ♪ applebee's new irresist-a-bowls now starting at $7.99. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

early in the show, i told you about ezra klein's new book, "why we're polarized." i'm fascinated by the subject so

i wanted to dig in deeper with the author, co-founder of the news organization vox. thank you for joining me. >> thank you for having me. >> trying to decide why we're so polarized, as you say it's because we like to think in terms of groups, we like to sort ourselves in groups, and we like to discriminate against other groups. tell the story of this scholar who was a holocaust survivor who does a keihind of experiment toy to make this point. >> this guy's name is henry toshe. he's a polish jew born in the '20s. he emigrates to france and becomes part of world war ii. he is put in a war camp and this is so important about his life as a french prisoner of war. if he had been understood as a polish jew, he would have been

killed. when the war is over, he was released and his whole family had been killed in the holoca t holocaust. he becomes obsessed with group identity. how do we understand if someone else in a group is not ours and what happens to us? how do we act when that takes hold? he creates these kind of studies known as millennial group of studies. he grabs a pair of boys from the same school and has them come in. we want you to do a quick experiment. look at the screen. how many dots do you think is on it? they say how many dots and researchers score their work. then they say, while you're here, we'd like to do a study totally different from that one, no relationship, but just for ease of use, we're going to separate you in groups that overestimated the dots and underestimated. this is randomly sorted. the next experiment is a random education study. these boys who are similar to each other, know each other, go to the same school and have been separated by a meaningless

characteristic, a dot estimation that is not even true, began discriminating against each other to give more money to people in the group. >> they get no money. so the money is being given to other people, and yet they give more to their group which is a meaningless group. >> what is striking about this study is this was supposed to be underneath the line of group behavior. what toshe wanted to do was begin by adding and adding and adding group dynamics to figure out when psychology would take hold. >> so this was meant to be sort of controlled where people paid no attention to the groups because they were so random and unimportant. and even there -- >> even there, that minimal. >> what does it tell you? it tells you that human beings what? >> we sort naturally and are psychologically tuned to see group differences between ourselves and others, and when they take hold, and this is one of toshe's key insights that has

been replicated again and again. once the psychology takes hold, we naturally feel hostility and tension against other groups. if you don't believe all the social science mumbo-jumbo, just look at sports. i grew up in northern california on the left. t our emotional highs go up and down and that's because sports key in on this group of technology. now we go to where it's firm, the stakes are higher, life and death, and you can see where this is playing with a primal part of our psyches. so we need to understand that it's playing on our psyche simultaneously. that has a very negative effect on our behavior. >> and you say it's been

happening in the last five or six years? why? >> not in the last five or six years, but we are about 20-years-ish before becoming divided racially. we are on our way again in about the 2040s to the religiously unaffiliated become the largest affiliation group in america. so we're in this period of a lot of racial, religious and demographic change. and among other things, that is activated in a deeper way than has normally been true in our politics, white identity. that isn't to say that white identity hasn't been powerful in american politics. it's been so powerful, it can be taken for granted. now it feels under threat, and that's changing the voting pattern of white americans. donald trump, what he does is go into the republican party and he says, the access of a political party should not be do you want

to cut medicaid or medicare, it shouldn't be do you want to raise taxes? it should be, how do you feel about people becoming browner, the economics in this country. how do you feel about that? and people say, you're right, i do feel more about that centrally. it's much easier to have stakes than a debate about whether we should do this or that. >> the two takeaways that are very immediate that i got from the book are the democrats need to understand when they try to appeal to people, particularly potentially under sighted voters. they need to know there is an affinity of some kind. the democrats have a much harder task because geographically the way the electoral college works, they have to move to the center. the republicans don't. >> it's a lot of what we're

talking about here, the psychological roots of polarization, but a lot of the book is about its interaction with the political institution and our particular political system. democrats have a hard task here. they need to see identity as a layer of politics. you know me and my background. i'm a policy reporter. i come into this because i needed a better explanation for how policy debates move from their positive beginnings where people can imagine a lot of different ways of solving a problem to this collapse of democratic wars. so democrats are not that good with policy. hillary clinton knows about 50 policies. donald trump has 7. none of them make much internal sense about how they're constructed, but it says a lot about him with symbolic communication. but the other point you make is taken as well. republicans can win and are winning in the senate right now throughout the white house and

the supreme court with a minority of the population. in each of those places, they got fewer votes than democrats. if democrats do not win central right voters, they don't win power. if they got 47% of the vote president trump got as president, they would be wiped out by the vote. democrats can't follow the same strategy as republicans, because republicans amplified in our political system, they have a path to power that is not so much required in the popular vote, which, by the way, is a bad thing for our political system. right now the republican party has not been disciplined by it. >> sobering words for the democrats to listen to and fascinating words for the rest of us. ezra klein, thank you so much. >> thank you. and we will be back.

most people think of verizon as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation... verizon keeps business ready.

east and west, north and south, countries all over the globe are once again tuning in to the threat of infectious diseases ask thend their spreadr globalized world. according to the global security index, which of the following nations is most prepared to contain large disease outbreaks? the netherlands, china, the u.s., or thailand? the answer to my gps question this week is c. as you know, the u.s. in an outbreak are typically high income. the u.s. is first among them. the global security report says international preparedness for epidemics and pandemics is very

weak. only four countries in the world have health care systems that are most prepared to treat the sick. considering the billions that outbreaks can cost, the lesson seems to be let's pay the cost now to improve readiness or else we will be paying in money and lives in the future. last week in telling you the answer to the question, we mistakenly included canada on a graphic of nations without paternity leave. new canadian fathers do indeed get paid leave. our bad. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. hello, everyone. thanks so much for joining us. i'm fredricka whitfield alongside john berman live from des moines, iowa. this is special coverage of the iowa caucuses. hi, john. welcome to sunday. tomorrow we'll get a real look at